Why do people think this mental patient's forced "gender neutral" voice is good?
Who are they?
>>64575675
yeah this, tranny bait works best when the subject is well known OP
how the fuck is it forced, that's just what she sounds like, it is a kind of an acquired taste I guess from how odd it can sound, but she has a great range and puts such great emotion behind it
>>64575644
you're really cool and clever xD xD xD
>>64575863
Ironic shitposting is still shitposting.
>>64575675
Hope There's Someone-guy
>>64575884
>guy
>>64575888
OK fair enough it's just I remember Antony and the Johnsons from the 2005 era when she was a he
>>64575919
she's been openly a she even then. the songs from 2005 are all about being trans.
>>64575945
interesting I never noticed that in the lyrics. Even with the with the Velvet Underground girl Candy on the cover
>>64575686
>>64575945
>she
Are you retards fuckin serious?
>you have earned 10 libstars!
>how is it forced
It sounds as unnatural as he looks
>>64576302
listen to some antony & johnsons lad, his voice has been the same for his whole career. that was the whole appeal, the weird voice
>>64576302
>you have earned 10 edgystars
Asshole
lol this trannys new album sucked
production was the only thing good in that cringefest of lyrics
OBAMMAAA cringe bitch needs to off herself
>>64576325
>Listen to some Antony & the Johnsons
I would have thought it was clear that I have
>>64576328
>Facts are edgy
Let the Libstars rain down upon you, O warrior of justice.
>>64576302
cunt
>>64576487
>gender neutral
that doesn't even make sense. go back.
>>>/pol/
>>64576381
>Facts are edgy
What? Yes biological sex is a fact, but the line isn't as distinct as that - autopsies on trans people have revealed brain structure more closely resembling the gender they identify as than their birth sex.
>>64576381
You seem to have constructed a mental complex that makes everyone you disagree with a radical social justice warrior. I'd suggest at least making some decent points if you're going to act edgy in a tranny bait thread.
>>64576581
>He doesnt switch between having a penis and a vagina every week
maximum kek
it's very very good, but it's so good that i can't bear to listen to it. "hope there's someone" scared the shit out of me and i couldn't make it through the rest of that album.
>>64576381
well then she's not for you, and that's perfectly fine. i still don't see the point in attacking her looks as it has nothing to do with the music.
>>64576487
Alright, due to the extraordinarily high proportion of traps on 4chan, it dawned on me why your jimmies were so rustled. I just wanted to let you know that I fully accept your feminine penis -- just don't expect me to believe that you magically became a female cause thats how you feel.
>>64576581
You're right. It doesn't make sense. You should visit /pol/ more often.
>>64576587
Yes, they have a psychological abnormality that causes delusional behavior.
>>64576594
>tranny b8 thread
Lol. I'm not even the one that made this shit about trannies.
>>64576608
>she's not for you
What an astute observation
>attacking her looks
I don't discriminate
Typical. Fucking. Liberals
>>64576701
why do you care so much about other people's gender identity and what they do with their lives? it doesn't affect you in the slightest.
>>64576738
This. I think you should evaluate why you feel the need to attack other people in this way.
>>64576701
>a psychological abnormality that causes delusional behavior.
And transitioning is the best treatment for this.
>>64576701
>you should visit /pol/ more often
B8 detected
>>64576738
I don't care in the slightest. What I DO care about is this nonsense that everything is just a social construct, and you can be whatever the fuck you wanna be (unless you're white and you pretend you're black and then become the leader of the NAACP... that shit is NOT ok)
>>64576773
>transitioning is the best treatment
And I fully support it. It's a genetic disorder, and I acknowledge the fact that it can't be "cured". I just prefer to call a spade a spade without sanctimoniously posturing in order to gain Libstars.
>>64576738
not him but I honestly auto-pilot called caitlyn jenner a he once
and got chewed out for 30mins by some feminist accusing me of being racist and misogynist
:( why are you ppl so mean. One my fav dj's is transgender(dj sprinkles)
>>64576826
>b8
Joke. Those imbeciles are as mental as any SJW, it's just antithetical.
>>64576832
But the point is that a trans person isn't the spade they appear to be. The physical body is just a vessel man.
>>64576855
Hah, that's pretty ridiculous. In my experience, most trans people don't really give a shit about accidental mistakes like that, it's just the intentional and sustained misgendering that fucks me off.
>>64576832
It's not libstars, dude. It's feminist pussy. The white night mentality. They couldn't care less what they say as long as it gets them that yeasty feminist punani.
>>64576773
>And transitioning is the best treatment for this.
I doubt it, bcuz most trannies commit suicide
the gubbermint is just ripping off mentally ill people and everyone else has to play along
>>64576855
You're lucky she didn't take you to court or get you fired or expelled or whatever she could possibly do to exercise her utter hatred of logical debate.
This is the world we live in, and this kind of fascism is rapidly spreading.
Ironically, I'm thoroughly leftist, but I'm not really into the insanity that is polluting liberal society at the moment.
>>64576701
>The liberals! The liberals are everywhere!
>>64576936
Transitioning lowers suicide rates though, anon.
Anecdotal, but I was terribly suicidal before HRT. Not so much now.
>>64576922
yeah I listen to this interview with genesis recently phttps://soundcloud.com/thetalkhouse/genesis-breyer-p-orridge-talks-with-laura-jane-grace and educated myself abit seems both of them are more understanding.
but I don't see why I got attacked like that. I swear i don't try to be mean on purpose. it was just a honest slip up.
I've just been avoiding any conversations regarding gender/race IRL nobody is rational anymore
>>64576982
>Transitioning lowers suicide rates though
A 2011 study at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden produced the most illuminating results yet regarding the transgendered, evidence that should give advocates pause. The long-term study—up to 30 years—followed 324 people who had sex-reassignment surgery. The study revealed that beginning about 10 years after having the surgery, the transgendered began to experience increasing mental difficulties. Most shockingly, their suicide mortality rose almost 20-fold above the comparable nontransgender population. This disturbing result has as yet no explanation but probably reflects the growing sense of isolation reported by the aging transgendered after surgery. The high suicide rate certainly challenges the surgery prescription.
>>64576982
That's too bad. You should reconsider.
>>64575644
Is that the guy from My Bloody Valentine
>>64576922
>the physical body is just a vessel
Whoa, maaan.
So hormones don't matter? Chromosomes? Anatomy? The fact that a woman can bear a child, but a man cannot? Naaah, those are simply trivial matters, huh?
Chances are if you have to go to such great lengths to become something (hormone replacement and genital mutilation), you're not that thing.
>>64576930
>getting feminist puss
Conservative cunts are WAY better fucks. I loathe them both about equally, but you really need to treat yourself to a Fox news-watching, bible-thumping, gun-toting dumbass.
You're welcome in advance.
>>64575644
rest in peace professor sanp
>>64577023
http://www.transadvocate.com/fact-check-study-shows-transition-makes-trans-people-suicidal_n_15483.htm
There's a counterargument for every study anon.
>>64577031
:) I like to think I'm doing better than someone who encourages someone else to commit suicide.
>>64576302
>Getting mad about pronouns
Please have sex
>>64576982
Hah. I KNEW it
If you're the one whose jimmies were disturbed to a point where they were sufficiently rustled, I genuinely didn't mean to make you feel bad.
But do you honestly get offended when someone doesn't theoretically accept you're a female?
>this entire thread
>>>/b/
>>64577046
I'm saying that the brain is where your thoughts, feelings and beliefs originate, and if these contradict your physical body, then it's more prudent to change the body to reflect the mind than to attempt the converse.
>>64577112
The window to weigh-in has closed, anon. We've established a cozy dialogue, and you're not allowed to be a part of it.
>>64577104
>I like to think I'm doing better than someone who encourages someone else to commit suicide.
Sounds like another one of those delusions people keep telling you about. Keep posting smilies as if you're actually happy though.
>>64577126
>But do you honestly get offended when someone doesn't theoretically accept you're a female?
That would make me happy, I'm was born female matey, went the other way. But to answer your question, I don't get offended, but I think the resistance people display to what is honestly a very vulnerable group is sad.
>>64577165
Oh I'm not happy, I'm still emotionally dead inside, but I feel like I'm getting better. :)
>>64577139
The funny thing is that I started the thread as a genuine attempt to understand what people see in this guy's voice, because I always hear people talk about how utterly beautiful it is, but I think it sounds like absolute dog shit. And then everyone latches on to the fact that I made an offhand remark about the fact that he's trans, and people threw a hissy fit.
>>64577017
People just like to use it as an opportunity to show that they "get it". The media fawn over Caitlyn Jenner because in doing so they can show that they're on the "right side" with regards to trans issues without having to seriously address them.
Like it's easy to go "oh isn't Caitlyn so beautiful, she looks just like a real woman!", but that completely ignores the reality that the vast majority of trans people can't afford the plastic surgery, stylist, makeup or whatever Caitlyn requires to look how she does. Instead of addressing the complexities of the situation facing the average trans person, they can just do a cover spread of Jenner and say "oh doesn't she look pretty" and move on and be done with it. The same people who call others out for misgendering Caitlyn Jenner probably laugh themselves at transwomen who pass less successfully than Jenner does because they simply don't have access to the same resources that she does.
It's easier to just defend the "easy" version of the issue and remain completely ignorant to what's actually a very complex and difficult situation. By calling out others who pass this "obvious" line (by calling Jenner a he or something), people can show that they "get it" without thinking too much about it or having to address anything more complex than being on the "right" side.
It's the same attitude that causes people to just go "well it was born with a dick so it's a man", it's just a nice simple way of dealing with a complicated issue, which the reality of the transgender experience undeniably is.
>>64577023
>>64577104
It's not even that, the passage he cites is from anti-trans right wingers and the creators of the studies have renounced the misrepresentation of the study. That doesn't stop people like him from repeating the same garbage over and over though, you're wasting your time discussing this with someone who's clearly not here for a sincere discussion in the first place.
>>64577203
>I don't get offended, but I think the resistance people display to what is honestly a very vulnerable group is sad.
On 4chan, I just always figure people are thick-skinned and accustomed to the vitriol, so I'm not going to walk on eggshells like I have to do regarding practically every subject IRL.
Having that said, believe it or not, I used to work in a gay bar (not gay), and played a drag queen fashion show at the Warhol museum, so that should give you an idea of where I'm coming from (not hate, just shitposting)
>>64577207
The funny thing is that you thought a "genuine" thread calling a trans person a "mental patient" was not going to result in a shit show. If your post seriously wasn't bait, then you honestly just sound like an edgy teenager and people are right to call you a moron anyways.
Here's a tip, next time you want to have a "genuine" discussion about an artist, don't start a thread with such edgy, bait worthy shit. You could have just wrote "Do people actually like this artists vocals?"
It's still a shitty, vapid and useless thread, but at least it's not so blatantly underaged.
>>64577245
You're right, I guess I have a fetish for pointless arguments.
>>64577291
No I getcha. I personally don't think people should ever have to walk on eggshells unless they're dealing with a mentally unstable person, these conversations about controversial topics are actually really important to have no matter what side you're on, they reduce reactionary and uninformed responses.
>>64577306
Gee, anon, those Ad homs really stung. I'll bet you thought you really nailed that post.
Here's a tip: next time, instead of participating in the "shit show", do what mommy and daddy taught you, and ignore it.
However, I'm sure you'll continue to be offended by every little thing that doesn't suit your self-righteous sensibilities. Stay mad, fascist.
>>64577232
>The media fawn over Caitlyn Jenner because in doing so they can show that they're on the "right side"
I wanna be on the wrong side of history
fuck this shit
>>64577291
Not the person you're replying to, but you honestly sound like a bit of an asshole.
I don't really understand why taking offense to an idea became the world's worst offense. It's not even that people are crying in their bedrooms and unable to sleep for days because you said "tranny," it's more that people think you're an asshole and no longer want to associate with you.
The irony here is that every one of you "sorry I rustled your jimmies" type are no more "thick-skinned" than the people you criticize. People often criticize your ideas because they're uneducated, unnuanced and painfully immature. The mere fact that people criticize the shitty things you say, or worse, call you an asshole sends people like you into a fury of "sorry I offended you," "didn't realize I'd have to walk on egg shells" or even worse "muh free speech."
The fact that you allegedly worked in a gay bar (I have gay friends guys!) doesn't mean you're not a transphobic prick, which honestly, it seems like you are. Hell, even your "I have gay friends" defense misses the mark, trans != gay.
If talking to an actual trans person gives you pause and makes you act more civil, perhaps you ought to take that a step back ever further and evaluate if being edgy on 4chan is really worth the anonymous brownie points you get.
>>64577207
what artists do you like?
>>64577406
Ah, that's cute, someone just read a wikipedia article on logical fallacies.
Sorry though, you don't get to invoke "le fallacy!!!" when every single one of your posts (this one included) is packed to the brim with them.
The irony here is that you're the one who seems a little offended.
Oh yes, and it looks like another right wing moron forgot what side the fascists are on. Oops!
When you make your entire personality based around your gender (or "trans" gender in this case) it makes you and any art you
create about it incredibly vapid and boring, only serving as means to say "I am this" which is pointless and inartistic, just vain and self-absorbing instead.
In summary OP, people's PC ideals are getting in the way of actually hearing what is pretty horrible to listen to.
Wouldn't want to hurt xer feelings.
>>64577104
>>64577245
I agree that people who have an emotional interest in not acknowledging the truth often take great efforts to do just that, and I agree that the field of sociology is a borderline pseudoscience currently brimming with charlatans desperately seeking to confirm their political biases, but the three sentence "refutation" of the "anti-trans right winger" media discussion of the 2011 Karolinska study is incredibly weak (I didn't realize The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, and the psychiatrist-in-chief of Johns Hopkins were all members of the KKK now).
The studies the Swedish sociologist cites as proof that "WPATH Standards of Care compliant treatment decrease gender dysphoria and improves mental health" do not contradict the results from her own study, and she probably knows it. Virtually none of the studies she cites have a comparable sample size or operate under similar conditions (most importantly the same longitudinal parameters) as the 2011 Karolinska study. Moreover, the WPATH Standards of Care compliant treatment is not evem the issue in discussion, which is specifically transgender surgery--it's a non sequitur.
Regardless of how Dhejne would prefer her results to be interpreted, the data is clear, not to mention much more relevant and informative than her attempts to dictate the narrative and force it to fit her government-sponsored ideological preferences.
>>64577513
This kinda. I don't care if someone is transgender or not just don't make it your only personality trait.
>>64577448
Another typical string of empty ad hominem attacks that don't even attempt to refute my "uneducated" remarks.
This is what I've come to expect from liberals these days -- just lazy posturing in the form of "you're a bigot".
Welp... I guess cause you say I'm an uneducated and immature asshole, I better go take my seat at the kids table.
>>64577449
Musicians? I listen to different types of classical-related stuff, and experimental electronic music mostly.
>>64577481
Amazing
There's no such thing as "gender neutral"
>>64576302
Why do trans people make you so upset?
>>64577598
You're a little late to the party, anon. Read the thread.
>>64577530
The thing is, there are a myriad of ways to manipulate data to make it fit with your own agendas and biases. I don't care enough to read the entire thing, but for starters, 324 is not a large sample size.
>>64577448
Well said.
>>64577513
being gay 100% shaped the person i am today. gender identity/sexual orientation is only a non-factor to your personality if you grow up in an area where no one bats an eyelash at minorities, which doesn't exist.
so what does the music sound like
>>64577566
That's not what an ad hominem attack is, by the way. I'd recommend you reread that wikipedia article.
There's also no way to refute any of your "arguments" because they weren't really arguments at all. Just empty buzzwords and pejoratives thrown around. If you seriously think "lol trannies" could even be "refuted" you are a fucking moron (again, this is not an ad hominem. reread that wikipedia article).
I honestly hope that you're underaged. If you're 16 or something, then at the very least there's still hope for you.
Now go ahead and give me another (You) where you act like an edgy asshole and assume everyone that thinks your an asshole is a "liberal"
>>64575644
The album itself is ok though
Great production. The lyrics are a cringefest but it's not unlike any other super-political album out there. The last The Knife's album was way more blatant than this and /mu/ took it well enough.
>>64577638
It does exist, it's called the west.
If being gay is your primary personality trait, you are kind of missing the point of a personality.
>>64575644
Why are you advertising him? I had know idea who he was until you posted him. Why spend time and effort into the things you don't like?
>>64577530
>and I agree that the field of sociology is a borderline pseudoscience currently brimming with charlatans desperately seeking to confirm their political biases
Who are you agreeing with, because that's certainly not my opinion.
>Regardless of how Dhejne would prefer her results to be interpreted, the data is clear, not to mention much more relevant and informative than her attempts to dictate the narrative and force it to fit her government-sponsored ideological preferences.
It seems like what you're really saying is that the people who did the study should not upset when unqualified non-professionals misinterpret it.
>the data is clear
have you read the entire study?
>and force it to fit her government-sponsored ideological preferences
[citation needed]
>>64577741
not when i get harassed and mocked almost daily here in the west m8.
it's not my primary personality trait (i don't associate with the gay scene here for example), but you can't undermine the tremendous influence it has on your personality.
/pol/ and Reddit are the worst things to happen to the Internet
>>64577728
Ad Hominem: (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
There, I even copypasted it for you. And I like how you even worked in the snide attempt to discredit me by implying that my education comes from wikipedia... sneaky sneaky
>your arguments are just buzzwords and pejoratives
Examples? I don't think you even know what you're arguing at this point lol. And furthermore, tell me about my position, and what you find so illogical about it? Or dont... in fact, don't.
Go ahead, take it as a win, m8. Now you can go tell all your friends about how you had to put an evil conservative (IMPLYING) in his place.
>>64577821
I agree, people don't know I'm trans unless I tell them these days, but my school days were utter shit because I didn't fit the norm. It's undeniable that being unusual in any way and being bullied for that will have major effects on your self esteem.
>>64577632
>there are a myriad of ways to manipulate data to make it fit with your own agendas and biases
That's very true, especially in sociology. 75% of major social psychology studies published in the past twenty years could not be replicated according the journal Science. But the issue in question was originally the claim that "Transitioning lowers suicide rates," and there significant evidence that suggests otherwise.
The simple fact that sociology is a weak science doesn't give us the right to dismiss all studies on the grounds that they simply might not confirm the narrative we prefer. It's difficult to attain a large sample size in Sweden when transgenders are less than a single percent of the population, and the 2011 Karolinska study was unusually large and thorough in this respect, especially compared to other transgender studies.
>>64577806
>Who are you agreeing with, because that's certainly not my opinion.
I'm agreeing with the poster who stated that there is a counterargument to every study, which implied a lack of scientific rigor in sociology whether he was aware of it or not.
>It seems like what you're really saying is that the people who did the study should not upset when unqualified non-professionals misinterpret it.
The psychiatrist-in-chief of Johns Hopkins is probably one of the most qualified people on the planet to interpret it. I certainly trust his judgement much more than a resentful mental defective on 4chan.
>have you read the entire study?
No, I've actually attended a university so I know how to read studies. I've read the relevant passages of the study that pertain to this discussion and excerpts provided to me by secondary literature.
>[citation needed]
You don't need a citation to cite a original interpretation of a person's ideology, which is fundamentally unempirical analysis. If you ever studied something on a serious academic level you might know this.
>>64575675
She's Anohni. She's also pretty shitty. At least when The Knife write a political song, they write a good one with palatable lyrics. Anohni is just heavy-handed and awkward.
>>64577889
For something to be an ad hominem attack, I must disregard your argument on the grounds of a unrelated attack on your character. You have no argument to disregard. Naughty words are not arguments.
On the same line of reasoning, I could have refuted an argument if I ever saw one and still call you a bigot. That's still not an ad hominem attack.
>Examples?
Do I really need to tell you why constantly saying "trannies" and "sorry to rustle your jimmies" are nothing more than shitty buzzwords and pejoratives? (and fallacious, by the way - Mr. Muh Fallacies).
The only thing I can see that vaguely resembles an argument is "trannies are ill!!" which is almost too dumb to even respond to. Better yet, why am I going to attempt to engage someone who is clearly shown such bad faith?
I'm not taking anything as a "win," probably because I didn't just read a logical fallacy article and decide that everything is a formal debate with "winners" and "losers."
>>64577975
The interesting thing is that the original author of the study claims that the purpose of the study has been misrepresented, and that the study doesn't actually reveal anything about whether transitioning is an effective means of treatment, but rather that the current state of care for trans people leaves a lot to be desired. Of course a bunch of right wingers will latch onto this though, and apply their own whack interpretation to the results, when you honestly can't determine the aetiology of these early mortality rates based on a single study - other factors such as stigma could be more relevant than someone's satisfaction with their medical transition.
>there is a counterargument to every study, which implied a lack of scientific rigor in sociology
How does this imply a lack of scientific rigour? Is it not important to criticise and analyse whether a study's methods were sound, lest we otherwise become satisfied with potentially incorrect or misleading information? If you're willing to trust a single person's analysis of something, then I don't think you know how to read a study at all,
>>64577975
>No, I've actually attended a university so I know how to read studies. I've read the relevant passages of the study that pertain to this discussion and excerpts provided to me by secondary literature.
You've just exposed yourself as a moron, then.
>The psychiatrist-in-chief of Johns Hopkins is probably one of the most qualified people on the planet to interpret it.
Really? Are you sure about that?
>You don't need a citation to cite a original interpretation of a person's ideology, which is fundamentally unempirical analysis. If you ever studied something on a serious academic level you might know this.
I'm asking for a citation that this is being forced by "government-sponsored ideology." You won't be able to provide any evidence.
Wondering what you took in University and how it relates to any relevant fields.
>>64577638
Every quality of your character "100%" shaped the person you are today then. You having black hair shaped your character "100%". You being born at 10:30 in the morning shaped your character "100%". You stubbing your toe in Ms. Johnson's 2nd grade class shaped your character "100%". The world shaped your character "100%". When you say that being gay shaped you're character that much, it makes it difficult for people to empathize with you who don't identify with that, and that's what you are trying to do. I'm not gay. I dont know what it's like to be gay. How am I supposed to connect with someone who identifies so heavily with something I have no experience of. You wouldn't be talking if you didn't want empathy from other people. Try and communicate in a way that expresses what you genuinely feel while also being understandable to your target audience.
>>64578403
i don't expect you to know how it feels to be gay and i don't care if you can't connect with me. i have no desire to "win you over" or whatever you think i'm trying to do.
we should all treat each other with basic respect by default.
>>64578192
1. You still haven't given an example of one of my arguments that you find so irrational (most likely due to the fact that you impetuously jumped into a discussion in order to assert your righteousness). Regardless, any attack on my personal character would qualify as an Ad hominem -- take notes so you don't look foolish quibbling over this in the future.
2. Never typed the word "tranny" once.
4. My assessment of individuals who have body dysmorphic disorder is fully accepted in the scientific community; however "mental patient" may be inaccurate, depending on their current habitat.
4. Consider this a preemptive disregard of whatever half-cocked rebuttal you may have regarding Ad hominem attacks
Ah yes another fantastic thread about music discussion
take it to /pol/
>>64578500
He's gonna point out those digits, senpai. Prepare your counterattack
>>64578674
Don't worry, I'm locked and loaded
>>64578500
1. I keep telling you that you haven't made an argument. Reading comprehension would help. I can't tell you which "arguments" are "irrational" when I've told you about 5 times that there's no argument to refute. And nope, that's still not what an ad hominem is. An ad hominem REQUIRES an argument to be disregarded with a personal attack used as the reasoning. Please, read beyond that line you copied from the google search. http://laurencetennant.com/bonds/adhominem.html
2. >>64576936
3. Which "assessments?" That "most trannies commit suicide?" You sure you want to argue that the scientific community fully accepts this? Perhaps you could actually tell me what "arguments" you're trying to make. Be sure to continue to use more palatable language now that it's convenient.
4. Okay. How about you stop desperately clinging to this "fallacy" considering most of your "arguments" have revolved around the use of pejoratives.
>>64578758
1. You keep telling me that I haven't made an argument... and you're wrong. And you've made numerous attempts to disregard my arguments based on an abundance of unfounded assertions about my character and education.
2. Lol. Not my post. Jesus fucking Christ, do I really have to go through my previous posts because you whiteknighted the fuck out of this thread and assumed which ones were mine? I guess so...
>>64576302
>>64576381
>>64576701
>>64576832
>>64577046
>>64577126
>>64577207
And I believe that is where you rode in on your high horse...
3. Appealing to emotion won't get you anywhere here, pal.
4. Literally none of my ARGUMENTS have contained pejoratives.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Pei4SnavUk
whatver gender this song bangs and the vocals are great
>>64578495
>>64578495
I don't think you're trying to win me over. I think you are trying to describe who you genuinely are as a person and having it fall on deaf ears, because you're speaking in an exclusive way that doesn't promote an exchange of ideas.
>>64579039
1. Please read the link that I gave you. I would have to actually engage one of your arguments for it to be an ad hominem attack.
Like seriously, just read it. You'll learn something new that you didn't learn reading a wikipedia article on logical fallacies.
2. I like how you're trying to pretend that that single post in that line of replies isn't yours and quoted a different post where you used the term trannies. Oops!
Not to mention that these "two" different people replied to me with the same post. Oops! >>64577566
3. Oh wow, you avoided clarifying what your actual argument was and instead threw another accusation of a fallacy that you don't understand. All I can see in these posts of yours is that you have a comically poor understanding of the difference between biological sex and gender.
4. From the very posts YOU quoted:
>retards
>o warrior of justice
>traps
>trannies
>liberals (don't pretend you're not using that in a pejorative sense)
>cunt
You're not even trying anymore.
>>64575644
I like Drone Bomb Me, but that's all I've heard. Is the rest good? Why am I asking you?
This thread is top-tier b8.
>>64579345
4 Degrees is good.
All the old stuff and collaborations range from good to amazing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3-T_HpNZYY
>>64579398
>>64579402
this video will not load for some reason. but cool, I'll probably like them based off the fact of a TG collaboration alone. album comes out in a couple days. sweet.
>>64579286
Congratulations, anon, you've managed to solidify yourself as the most insufferably thickheaded individual I've debated in quite a long time. But have nothing better to do at the moment, so why not...
1. Well you're the one who kept telling me that i didnt HAVE any arguments. So you're admitting that you never even knew what grounds you were attacking me on?... K
2. Heh. The time is nigh, anon. You're floundering... just give into it. It'll all be over soon.
3. My mistake (but not really), I just realized that this tied in with 2, which wasn't my post in the first place, and I was under the impression that you were appealing to emotion, based on the fact that the suicide rates are very disproportionate.
4. Retards: does not negate my position (which is logical)
O warrior of justice: lol. Playful banter =/= Ad hom
Traps: banter
Trannies: not my words
Liberals: interesting that you'd feel this way
Cunt: that was in relation to something completely unrelated
W E W
>>64579684
>debate
lol
1. What? I'm "attacking" you on the grounds that you're an obnoxious asshole. That has little to do with your "arguments." Have you read the page I sent you? It'll take three minutes. You'll learn what that fallacy you abuse actually means.
2. Okay
3. You still haven't clarified what your "argument" is and how I've objected to it.
4. I like how the contemptuous language you use is "playful banter," but me calling you a bigot is "le fallacy!!!"
I also like that you actually spent time trying to defend these comments as not being ad hominem attacks as if I fucking said they were. I can tell you didn't read the page I sent you since you still have zero clue what the terminology you use actually means.
And sorry, "trannies" is in your own words, in the same sense that "hey man, I'm not making this discussion about niggers!!!" is adopting the same slur that other people use. You also know that I don't buy for a second that the other post isn't yours, right?
This is besides the point point though. Clearly the rest of your posts have demonstrated that you have no problem throwing around pejoratives and buzzwords and clearly you have a negative view of trans people as much as you'd like to pretend you never said "tranny."
Now still waiting to hear these arguments I disregarded. I don't expect you to actually address this though. That would require a modicum of sincerity from you.
that's a "she" ???
I don't get trans people, they say that they need to be able to accept themselves and be who they really are but they're kinda doing the opposite.
I guess they're just like all SJWs though, a bunch of hypocrites circ-jerking and fucking up society
>>64575644
If Kevin Shields and the Gooch had a bastard son.
>>64580039
You're laughing at the idea that this is a debate, because the only thing you've brought to the table is some emotional shit-flinging. If I had known that your intentions were merely to name call, and that you had NO intentions to provide a single substantive argument to the root of my position, I would have jerked off instead.
So you essentially could have began and ended with "you're an obnoxious asshole". And now you're taking refuge in the fact that you were simply name-calling all along. Amazing.
You calling me a bigot is one thing, but calling me uneducated and implying that I'm being juvenile doesn't make much sense if you don't even know what you're referring to (the word trap?). You can continue the desperate attempt to pin a word to me (tranny), and insinuate that I'm just a close-minded bigot, but the fact is, it carries absolutely NO WEIGHT.
If you ever need a reference point for when people refer to the hyper-sensitivity that is plaguing rational discourse, you need only to refer to this "debate", and the fact that you'd rather just engage in smug posturing.
>>64579684
>>64580039
retard fight
He
He
He's got a Y chromosome
He's a man
>>64580481
this this this
People are offended way too fucking easily and need their little safe spaces and political correctness, and rather than having an actual debate with people they just throw shitty insults around to make them feel better about not having an actual argument
Morons getting into internet arguments again. Good game lads. This is why many trans people don't say shit about their biological gender.
drone bomb me is a good song
>>64580544
XX males and XY females can exist dude, the chromosome argument has no basis since this is about brain function anyway.
>>64580561
This tbqh
>>64580481
>"""rational""" discourse
LOL
still waiting for you to tell me what your arguments were and how I objected to them
how many more posts will we go through before you finally decide to stop evading this?
>>64580547
Assuming you haven't quoted yourself, perhaps you'd like to point out which arguments this person has made since he's clearly never going to share them.
>>64580561
Yeah, trans people don't say anything about their "biological gender" because they're tired of internet arguments.
>>64580547
>why won't people have an actual debate about my "niggers are subhuman" theory?
>>64580634
I just read that last one, I'm pretty stoned rn and dont feel like going through them. But I do really agree with him on the basis that most people simply say "you're just a bigot" or "you're racist" and get all butthurt just because someone doesn't agree with them. Not gonna read back, but I'm guessing the arguments are about trans people for the most part? I just gotta say that a lot of them do have something legitimately wrong with them and could use some help.
This whole thing is pretty fucking stupid though, arguing isn't going to solve anything. This shit's pretty tumblr-tier
>>64580561
this m8
>>64580717
KEK!
"""her""" voice is awful tbf
>>64580634
Theyre in my previous posts and I'm not going to mark them again for you. I'm curious, when did your mother stop breastfeeding you?
I'll sum it up for babby: If you would have been able to put my posts into a summation, it would have looked something like this (I'll even a expound on my position to make it more palatable)...
While I fully accept the fact that there is a genetic physiological condition that causes an individual to exhibit delusional behavior, in which they believe they are the opposite sex (gender and sex are inextricable), I refuse to accept the notion that they magically become the opposite sex because they dress a certain way/mutilate their genItals/take hormones.
Their are innate biological/chemical/anatomical characteristics that are unfortunately impossible to get around. And my sympathies for people who become despondent, and often attempt suicide because of this fact+social stigma. But that doesn't mean that I'm going to subscribe to this bleeding-heart fantasy-land, in which everything is treated as a social construct -- post-structuralism was good for a few things, but I ABHOR this aspect of it.
>>64580738
My point is that he doesn't really have any arguments. Most of his posts are just calling trans people "trannies," "mental patients" and calls people who disagree with him "retards" and "typical liberals" who just have their "jimmies rustled."
If you think this deserves a serious, "rational" discussion, then I don't even know what to say. If he actually presented a coherent argument that wasn't littered with buzzwords, I might've engaged his "arguments." Instead he's spent the last hour shouting "fallacy!" instead of answering my request to put forth a coherent thought.
But nah, calling him an asshole for this is where you draw the line and ironically get offended yourself.
>>64580717
People debate that particular subject all the time actually. Every few years there is another media flareup when a distinguished academic notes that the average intelligence of a black person is lower than the average intelligence of other races. Consequently, every few years the offended but unqualified progressive media establishment publishes a sea of thinkpieces on how this discussion is very problematic and concerning. The propagator of the theory is deemed evil in the minds of the lay public, everybody pats themselves on the back for being so tolerant, and the matter is considered settled until a few years later yet another distinguished academic brings up the same point again.
Progressives don't like the conclusions of the debate, and they like even less that it's difficult to prove wrong, so they settle for insults and insular high fiving. Smug posturing is after all the progressive's primary mode of argument.
>>64580937
Oh, I should probably lurk more then haha that shit just makes him a bit of a hypocrite. I still think it's kinda silly to argue seriously with strangers online, but IMO a lot of them have identity issues and don't really know what to do or how to feel because life is confusing as hell and society pushes all this different shit on people now.
Even then, that's just my opinion and it doesn't really matter much in society. You gotta admit though, it's kinda crazy how many people get butthurt over people having different opinions than they do, both online and in real life.
>>64581073
**by them I meant trans people and all that, not just the people arguing
>>64580937
He has made several points in direct response to you, but you choose to ignore them and instead attack his language and tone. This is because whining about prejudice is much easier than actually engaging with somebody on an intellectual level.
>>64580923
>While I fully accept the fact that there is a genetic physiological condition
This is a fact? Which gene is responsible for this? I'm asking for a citation, by the way.
>gender and sex are inextricable
Really? On what basis? Do you have any reasoning for this? Do you completely disregard any societal or cultural impacts on gender roles? How do you explain different cultural gender roles? How do you explain cultures where multiple genders can be assigned to the same sex?
> I refuse to accept the notion that they magically become the opposite sex because they dress a certain way/mutilate their genItals/take hormones.
That's great, but some equivocation. Gender is the word you're looking for.
>Their are innate biological/chemical/anatomical characteristics that are unfortunately impossible to get around.
Name some of them and how they relate to gender roles. Which "biological/chemical/anatomical" characteristic is responsible for the female sex wearing dresses?
>>64580923
Not the person you're engaging with but nobody is asking anybody to accept that trans people 'magically become the opposite sex', trans people seriously don't believe this, but rather to accept that their gender does not align with their birth sex - it's really not that difficult to understand.
Also consider that a trans person who has taken hormones long term is not biologically analogous to their birth sex, particularly biochemically.
Can we stop calling trans surgery genital mutilation? It's not mutilation if it's necessary for someone's mental health.
Man oh man this is what's wrong with this board, someone posts a topic and instead of discussing it people end up having arguments and debates and just bash each other's opinions. This shit ain't /pol/ why cant we all just get along and shit on each other for our music taste like in the good ol days?
>>64581073
I do think it's silly, but I don't know why you think I'm so "butthurt." I'm not advocating for a "safe space" where this person can't share his thoughts or opinions. I'm criticizing them. I'm not sure how or when criticism became such a terrible, unspeakable thing.
>>64581158
>It's not mutilation if it's necessary for someone's mental health.
Transgender genital mutilation i.e. "transitioning" actually is well-documented with higher suicide rates, especially later in the mutilated's life. This has already been discussed earlier ITT.
>>64581108
Show me some of the points that actually related to his original argument and not crying "fallacy" because I called him an asshole for calling people trannies.
And wow, wouldn't you know, I actually responded to him when he tried to form a coherent argument. >>64581154
>>64581222
I'm not saying you're butthurt I'm saying people in general get butthurt while discussing things like this. Criticism's a good thing m8 keep on doing that
>>64581228
Read more carefully, that study doesn't necessarily reveal anything about the effectiveness of surgery. Also the fact that it's voluntary kind of negates the mutilation - it's similar to the difference between genital mutilation at birth and circumcision voluntarily undertaken later in life.
>>64581222
>I don't know why you think I'm so "butthurt."
This is a really butthurt thing to say, honestly
>>64581228
You mean the article you posted that was already refuted an hour ago?
>>64581316
I don't really care if you think I'm "butthurt" or "buttblasted." "U mad bro" is the shittiest, laziest way to dismiss an opinion you don't like.
Now feel free to tell me I'm not helping my case and I'm actually super angry, completely missing the point.
>>64581293
Cool, cheers.
>>64581306
>Read more carefully, that study doesn't necessarily reveal anything about the effectiveness of surgery.
*Read while taking every effort to deny any correlation between undergoing a controversial surgical procedure that involves the destruction of one's genitals and suicide, that study doesn't necessarily reveal anything about the effectiveness of surgery.
If the surgery is supposed to make transgender people happier, why do they commit suicide at disproportionately higher levels after undergoing it? Suicide is perhaps the ultimate indicator of an unhappy life, and nobody's life is more unhappy and depressing than an aging eunuch with no connection to reality or himself.
Self-mutilation is a common term in psychological literature--the fact that one's self-harm was voluntary is evidence of psychological disorder, and doesn't disqualify the term "mutilation" from usage.
>>64581339
I haven't posted in articles in this thread.
>>64581154
>this is fact?
If you do a simple google search (frankly, I've held your hand enough), you'll find copious peer reviewed articles on the matter; however, I'm not a biologist/neurochemist, so I'll accept the fact that the disorder doesn't come out of thin air, and that genetic traits are most likely responsible for the condition. If you'd prefer the omission of "genetic", then physiological abnormality would certainly suffice.
On what basis is gender and sex inextricable? No sex = no gender. Succinct enough for you?
Multiple genders being assigned to the same sex? A fantasy-land of imagination.
>gender is the word you're looking for
See: above. I refuse to be baited into your schizophrenic labyrinth of social constructs, because that would only detract from the objectivity that I'm attempting to elucidate.
Characteristics responsible for "gender" traits: Hormones, reproductive systems, anatomy -- if these things were merely trivial matters, then why would an individual who suffers from body dysmorphic disorder need to change a thing if it's all in the mind or a product of social norms?
Is your head spinning yet? Mine sure is
>>64581258
You responded with a bunch of pompous questions
>>64581458
>If the surgery is supposed to make transgender people happier, why do they commit suicide at disproportionately higher levels after undergoing it?
Have you considered that the stigma associated with being trans is more likely to trigger mental illness? If you were looking at mental health across different races, would you immediately point to a genetic difference or consider the sociological and cultural impacts?
>>64581458
I'd like to point out that the author of that study didn't believe that the results indicate that we should never allow trans people to medically transition, she suggested that there were potential problems in the way medical transition is conducted.
Look around and you'll find plenty of contradicting studies. Here's one for your consideration: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2014/09/02/peds.2013-2958.abstract.
Also there's a difference between repeated self-harm as a function of a psychological disorder, which shouldn't be condoned, and a one-time surgery that is designed to improve mental wellbeing. I would fucking know, I've been through both.
What is this album about? I've been curious to listen to her but if it's just going to be an hour or so of trans rights and bullshit like that, in which I can't relate to or feel strongly either way about (sure let them be who they want, but I don't want to listen to a whole album about it), or are there relatable lyrics for the average person? Given the fact that all the Antony and the Johnsons catalog is all described as LGBT music, and this is probably even more so, should I even bother? Perfume Genius was decent but after a while the topic became really fucking stale.
>>64581609
How about the simple fact that they spend their lives wishing they were something they're not, and go to relatively extreme measures in an attempt to make themselves whole, yet in the end, they come to the hard realization that they'll never truly be the thing that they feel? Pretty commonsensical, huh?
When will liberals realize that they're just as bad as conservatives when it comes to the well-being of the oppressed... maybe worse in many ways
>>64581535
>If you do a simple google search (frankly, I've held your hand enough), you'll find copious peer reviewed articles on the matter; however, I'm not a biologist/neurochemist, so I'll accept the fact that the disorder doesn't come out of thin air, and that genetic traits are most likely responsible for the condition. If you'd prefer the omission of "genetic", then physiological abnormality would certainly suffice.
You said that it was a "fact" that there is "genetic physiological condition" that causes an individual to exhibit "delusional behavior" that causes people to believe the are the "opposite sex." I asked for a citation for this claim, not for you to play with your language to return a study that will fit your newly defined terms.
>Characteristics responsible for "gender" traits: Hormones, reproductive systems, anatomy
[citation needed]
>>64581954
>Genetic: of or relating to genes or heredity
You do realize that God isn't responsible for arbitrarily assigning traits to each individual, right?... if not, I really can't handle that one right now lol
>newly defined terms
I think you'll find that "physiological abnormality" is far more anodyne than the accepted definition of the condition; however, it would be a completely objective way to describe it.
>citation needed
Science
And with that, I'm at home with checkmating the absolute shit out of you. Let's face it, you've been flopping around like a fish out of water for the past hour.
Thanks for curing my boredom. Time to jerk off with my gender neutral penis.
Stay noble, pony boy
>>64581900
What part of that "realization" has to do with the role of society and the enforcement of gender roles? I think that one of the reasons many trans people decide to undergo gender reassignment surgery is likely because they think it'll make their gender identity seem more "real" to other people. In fact, I've seen people argue that if someone has not undergone hormone therapy or surgery, they're not a "real" transperson.
I don't think it's really a question of wishing they were "something they're not," in what ways does having a penis restrict you from wearing a pink dress or being effeminate?
>>64582235
For many trans people it's a discomfort with their body and genitals. The enforcement of gender roles is distressing for transgender people because it's a reminder that they do not have the parts they want, rather than because they want to wear a dress or whatever.
>>64582211
You've completely missed my objections to your original statement, good job friend. Keep beating the shit out of that strawman.
I want to see studies that show a genetic or hereditary link to "delusions" of "sex" You don't get to neutralize your language or equivocate when it suits your needs.
>citation needed
>Science
There's no better way to say you're talking out of your ass than to cite "science."
>And with that, I'm at home with checkmating the absolute shit out of you. Let's face it, you've been flopping around like a fish out of water for the past hour.
And no better way to prove you've "won" an argument by proclaiming yourself the "winner"
Why did I think you'd ever present a sincere argument? What a waste of time for everyone.
>>64582235
>enforcement of gender roles
>mankind will never be complete and 100% equal until we completely obfuscate any ostensible signs that there are inherent differences between the sexes
This is what your line of reasoning is perpetually pointing towards -- an unachievable utopian fantasy.
>in what ways does having a penis restrict you from wearing pink or being effeminate?
"Effeminate"? How dare you!! Have you ever thought about the innate biological factors that may make females more predisposed to be attracted to pink?
>>64582355
Where does that discomfort with their body come from? Why do transgender people feel like changing their genitalia will bring them closer to their desired gender? Is that a biological urge or one born of social conditioning? I'm definitely not saying that trans people are merely cross-dressers.
>>64582434
Good job m8, you completely demolished the position I never took.
>>64582495
I suspect it's biological - people that are simply uncomfortable with social conditioning don't necessarily feel the need to change their bodies, but rather society's perception. I can't speak for others but personally I feel a deep sense of revulsion with my body and genitals that has existed for as long as I can remember, but I don't really give a shit about how people perceive me.
>>64581228
it says suicide rate is higher than the general public post transitioning. is it higher or lower than pre-transitioning? being trans at all raises the rate a lot.
>>64582402
>missed objections
>false equivocation
False
>expecting what would be a very long essay on how science is able to illuminate how innate biological traits have an effect on gender roles. Do you google?
>proclaiming yourself the winner
Someone has to point out the obvious
>>64582601
Do you think it's possible that your revulsion towards your body could be related to the way we view sex and gender? I think it's cool that you don't care what people think (not being facetious), but could your self criticism be influenced by your own conditioning?
It's wrong to be Trans.
>>64582722
>refuses to cite anything and continuously declares himself the winner in an internet "debate"
this is your last (You)
>>64582767
then i don't want to be right
>>64582767
It's hip to be trans too. One way to tell if a tranny's just doing it for the attention is if they're insufferable. The more insufferable they are, the more blatant it is.
Get rid of 'em.
>>64582765
You know, I don't personally think so, I had a very gender neutral upbringing (well as much as is possible). I'm not denying the possibility because nurture plays a strong role in development, but there also has to be a neurological component, because it's really not the norm to feel so disconnected from your body to the point of actual self harm. Even if it was a product of social conditioning, I wouldn't change taking T and having surgery, because it let me stop obsessing over my body and focus on the actual important things in life. Again, I can't really speak for others.
>>64582887
>hip to be trans
lol
>>64582765
And there it is... the sanctimonious bleeding-heart's attempt at "understanding" (normalizing) something in order to assuage the oppressed. And the answers are further validating the point that he's been attempting to refute for the past hour.
What's it like to be so virtuous and open-minded, anon?
>>64580434
I don't have an appropriate reaction face for that one, so here's this.
>>64582926
Do you ever feel like SJW's should stop speaking for you?
>>64583030
Yeah, I don't really think anyone should speak for other people while claiming any sort of authority because that just results in inaccuracy and the erasure of people's actual experience. I do think the whole SJW boogeyman thing 4chan has going on is a little silly, I'd rather hang out with the SJWs than /mu/ tbqh, but yes, many people on both sides of of the SJW/feminism/whatever are incapable of understanding nuance.
>>64582926
Transgender oppression is a joke. Trannies kill themselves more than they get killed / even assaulted. And they kill themselves not because they're oppressed, but because they're mentally ill. This is also another way to tell if someone who calls themselves transgender is doing it for the attention, they don't do it — I mean, have you seen that suicide rate?
There's all the more reason to, imagine not passing (and not even TRYING to pass), being insufferable across all social media, bitching about cis privilege and trying so hard to be intersectional. If you're ugly, don't try to be trans. Just don't.
Again —
Get rid of them.
>>64582926
I see, thanks for the insight.
>>64582958
What are you talking about? I'm just asking someone about their experience and not being a complete and utter dick about it.
>>64583120
>the whole SJW boogeyman this has gotten silly
Within these boundaries, that's absolutely true; nevertheless, there IS a very tangible threat when it concerns the future of dialectics.
This attitude where any hint of bigotry is met with a flurry of histrionic personal attacks is becoming more and more commonplace. And the scary thing is that younger generations are the ones getting worse and worse.
>>64583124
>>Get rid of them.
Sounds like they're doing a good job of it already, why the obsession?
>>64583124
Okay. It's funny because I'm a socially anxious wreck, the last thing I want is attention. I've literally never bitched about cis privilege. But keep on generalising. :)
>If you're ugly, don't try to be trans
Lol, there's no such thing as trying to be trans matey. Also no correlation between ugliness and passing, I 100% pass as a cis guy and I'm not really blessed in the looks department.
>>64583268
Wow man, you should start a petition to ban social justice from universities. Ban that Marx fellow too.
>>64583268
>This attitude where any hint of bigotry is met with a flurry of histrionic personal attacks
I've honestly not encountered this outside of the internet so I don't know about it being a tangible threat, but I generally agree, we should never allow discourse to be stifled.
>>64583197
>what are you talking about?
Elaborating obviously doesn't do any good with you, because you'll just cry "false equivocation" or "strawman" or some other version of "you're not providing the exact answer that I want to hear"
wew what a thread
i think that if people want to identify as a gender different from the one that they are assigned that's okay because it doesn't affect me at all.
I like anohni's voice it sounds good
>>64575644
literally the AOTY
>>64583363
Another total misrepresentation
See, this kind of display of intellectual dishonesty is why no one with half a brain takes your kind seriously
>>64583382
You know, I think the guy was just asking a question, it wasn't particularly offensive.
>>64583490
It's a good thing we have people like Sargon, TheAmazingAtheist and anonymous 4channer #24890 to set the world straight. Fight those boogeymen, good sir.
>it's a transgender/"SJW" hate thread
Regardless of politics, the "Let's harass someone because they MIGHT have done / said something problematic" thing is getting out of hand. The wonderful thing about the word "problematic" is that it's characterized as a boogey(wo)man's word, but /pol/ and /pol/ wannabes bitch and moan and whinge about so-called "degeneration" because of rap, because this thing happened at this university/college, etc.
I sure do love it when someone gets fired because they committed thought-crime, great social justice!!!!!!
Is shitflinging "rational discourse"? I don't think so. I think posts on every discussion site should be limited to ~1000 characters at least, there would be far less bullshit if that was the case. And far more. At least I wouldn't have to see Tumblr and /pol/ spam shit memes and shit posts on every other fucking board ever.
This is such an incredibly music related thread, though. Right, fuck transgender people, they're really fucking up society with their "I want to be treated like a human being" thing! MUSIC!
>>64576302
Have you tried being so ironically edgy because you're 15 that you've become the personification of edgy? or are you just retarded.
>>64576701
>psychological abnormality that causes delusional behavior
W- who invited Alex Jones on /mu/
back to >>>/pol/ you go don't forget your bag of fags!
>>64583557
Ooooo, you don't know him/her (them) the way I do, anon. We have a history (this thread) lol
>>64583587
Do you see a trip? Am I getting any upvotes? Have I plugged a youtube channel? Or am I just one of the many pathetic anons who have nothing better to do, and so I'm spending my time attempting to prove my intellectual superiority because it makes me feel better about my shitty life?
At the end of the day, I really don't care whether or not people eat each other alive with vitriol; I haven't felt like a part of society for a long time, and so I'm more interested in the social/psychological aspect of equation. And this is usually how it plays out: I state some facts, and chaos ensues.
>>64583840
>I state some facts, and chaos ensues.
>Why do people think this mental patient's forced "gender neutral" voice is good?
>she? Are you retards fuckin serious? you have earned 10 libstars!
>Let the Libstars rain down upon you, O warrior of justice.
>it dawned on me why your jimmies were so rustled
>Lol. I'm not even the one that made this shit about trannies.
>Typical. Fucking. Liberals
>Conservative cunts are WAY better fucks.
>most trannies commit suicide
He states FACTS. Sorry you're OFFENDED by them.
>>64583840
I'm the guy that answered their (lol wrong thread to assume gender) question, I thought they were just another random passerby. Honestly I'm confused by who's who in this argument.
>>64584014
I asked you the questions and I was in no way attempting to prove a point. I was genuinely asking to learn more about your experience.
The anon you're responding to (the OP of the thread, by the way) seems to take offense that I didn't call you a tranny with a mental illness and thinks that I am only asking for your experience to gain "libstars."
>>64583979
Sure, it was an insensitive way to phrase the initial question, and that may make me an asshole, but instead of going completely off the grid with the incinuations, simply calling me a prick (or whatever) would thoroughly get the point across. But no, instead it was turned into a contest in who could provide the best variation on "you're a bigot" and "you're uneducated".
These blips that you cite were interspersed with actual arguments that not a single person was able to refute -- in fact, no one even tried!
Still never said tranny lol
>>64584163
You said tranny twice, stop pretending you didn't.
General rule of thumb: people may be more interested in taking you seriously if you're not littering your posts with slurs and memes.
Like maybe you have a good point about race relations, but if you phrase your argument like "niggers are scum, prove me wrong" people might not bother listening to what you say.
All I'm saying is don't act personally wounded when people respond to your obnoxiousness negatively.
>>64584157
>Continuing to make attempts at besmirching my anonymous character
It's times like these when I'm reminded of why I only have these debates anonymously. You are the epitome of an intellectually dishonest SJW... an absolute shining example. And I have little doubt that you're the type who would do your best to get someone fired from their job for making an insensitive remark.
This is why it would be in everyone's best interest to address this brand of fascist behavior before it's too late. That may sound a bit melodramatic and alarmist, but people like you scare the fuck out of me
>>64584157
Right, thanks, your questions were fine. Honestly this is a clusterfuck of a bait thread.
OP, there's literally no personal benefit to be had from asking about others' experiences beyond expanding your understanding of others, I'm not sure why you think 'liberals' do so to bolster their personal image or something.
>>64584231
The ride never ends, and the unfounded assertions are still intact.
>people may be interested in taking you seriously if you're not littering your posts with memes and slurs
And perhaps this is the crux of the matter: If you paid less attention to trivial triggers, and more attention to the actual content of what the person is saying, then maybe you'd begin to gain a more well-rounded perspective on a subject, and then you could make attemots at elevating your dialogue from "heeey, but dats waycist"
>>64584303
>SJW
took a long time, lol
>And I have little doubt that you're the type who would do your best to get someone fired from their job for making an insensitive remark.
You'd be wrong. That doesn't mean I wouldn't call someone a racist if they made a racist comment. There's a lot of different options other than "unquestionably accept anything anyone says" and "attempt to ruin their live as a result."
Calling you a bigot != getting you fired or censoring you or whatever the fuck you think is happening.
>This is why it would be in everyone's best interest to address this brand of fascist behavior before it's too late.
Agreed, we ought to stand up before I theoretically get you fired from the theoretical job you have because you wanted to call people trannies on an image board. Fight those fascists who have now magically shifted to the left.
>>64575644
is that isaac brock
>>64584529
> If you paid less attention to trivial triggers, and more attention to the actual content of what the person is saying, then maybe you'd begin to gain a more well-rounded perspective on a subject, and then you could make attemots at elevating your dialogue from "heeey, but dats waycist"
The problem is that, generally speaking, if someone uses the word "nigger" or "tranny" or talks about "rustling jimmies" in their "argument," they very likely have nothing of value to say and are attempting to be antagonistic. I'm not interested in "honestly" engaging every edgy /b/tard on the hope that maybe, somewhere deep down they have a coherent thought if I wade through the bullshit "trannies are mentally ill, sorry to rustle your jimmies" type rhetoric. You're welcome to continue with the edginess and complaining about how people are easily "triggered," or you could enter a discussion like an adult and not be obtuse as to why someone may think you're immature and prejudice if you're using terms that serve no purpose other than to offend or get a rise out of people.
But nah, dude, keep telling yourself that SJWs are ruining the world and destroying your ability not to be criticized for being edgy.
>>64584328
>no personal benefit to be had from asking about others experiences
How could I refute that? However, regarding these trendy social topics, there is often an agenda among bleeding-hearts to bolster their preconceived notions by asking loaded questions, and in turn, they ignore the information that conflicts with their self-righteous values, and cherry pick the ones that reinforce them. And to top it all off, they often attack the empirical evidence if it's slightly resembles a value-judgement
I suppose you could say the same about any ideological group, but a quick example of what I'm referring to would be the exchange that the two of you had
>Anon asks you about the nature/nurture relationship
>you respond with an answer that didn't bolster his arguments
>he attempts to goad you into a more satisfactory answer
The data is literally right here. We're on the internet. Use google, and don't expect everyone to kowtow to your risibly loaded questions that require a fucking dissertation (there's some advice that no one asked for lol)
>>64584769
I honestly did not expect this shit storm to ensue. I thought that anons were more thick skinned than that.
If this took place in person, I would certainly mind my p's and q's like a good little boy.
>>64585069
You know I'm familiar with the idea of leading questions, but I fail to see what agenda this supports. I didn't even support their notion that transgenderism is a product of nurture, I suggested that it couldn't possibly be purely social, but I'm willing to consider that environmental factors have a role.
>I thought that anons were more thick skinned than that.
I love that you respond to criticism by casting the other person as thin-skinned, like it's impossible to oppose the use of offensive language without being personally offended.
>>64584769
>OP gets over a hundred long ass responses to his posts
>must be because of the lack of content
>>64585251
The irony here is that he is equally as "thin skinned" when he receives criticism for the things he says.
>>64585374
Mm the exact people that complain about trigger warnings and safe spaces seem to need their own trigger warnings and safe spaces. A delicate flower by any other name is still a delicate flower.
>>64585251
>I suggested that it couldn't be purely social
You're all over the map. I don't even know if you're my buddy from 6 hours ago LOL
>like it's impossible to oppose the use of offensive language without being personally offended
Be offended all you want, but at least have the decency to either call me a name and then fuck off, or bring one substantial argument to the discussion... just ONE.
And no, I don't think it's safe to assume what you are, and are not familiar with.
>>64585279
Responding to complete misrepresentations of ideological positions, words used, and logic, is not the same as being offended by a word and subsequently attacking a person by using a variety of snide tactics.
Who is this semen demon?
>>64585374
The second part of >>64585554 was meant for you!!
>>64585554
That's not me, that's the person you're trying to convince I'm using for my own personal gain. Oops.
>>64585554
>Responding to complete misrepresentations of ideological positions
I know, right? How could anyone possibly misinterpret these sound logical positions?
>Why do people think this mental patient's forced "gender neutral" voice is good?
>she? Are you retards fuckin serious? you have earned 10 libstars!
>Let the Libstars rain down upon you, O warrior of justice.
>it dawned on me why your jimmies were so rustled
>Lol. I'm not even the one that made this shit about trannies.
>Typical. Fucking. Liberals
>Conservative cunts are WAY better fucks.
>most trannies commit suicide
>there are people who believe transgenderism isn't a mental disorder
I just don't understand how anybody could think otherwise. Gender dysphoria causes nothing but suffering and makes you unable to function in society, let alone in your own head. You can chop off your balls but you can never scrub away that Y chromosome. I've never seen a middle-aged transgender person who successfully "passed" as the gender they were imitating.
Transgendered people shouldn't be encouraged, they should be helped to understand how to be happy in the body they were born with. Legitimizing and rationalizing their disorder with surgery just exacerbates the problem and seals them from ever being cured.
In a couple centuries people will look back in disgust at how we paraded around the mentally disturbed as if they were soldiers of progress
>>64585773
>I've never seen a middle-aged transgender person who successfully "passed" as the gender they were imitating.
But this line of logic falls apart the second you consider that you wouldn't even know if you saw a trans person who did pass.
>>64585564
Adele
>>64585844
Name one.
>>64585862
If someone was indistinguishable from a cisgendered person, how could I know to tell you they were transgender?
>>64585554
>You're all over the map. I don't even know if you're my buddy from 6 hours ago LOL
Mate, I'm not gonna buddy up with someone with your disparaging beliefs. I'm not sure how I'm all over the map, I've been pretty consistent in my position, perhaps you have me confused with someone else.
>>64585773
>Transgendered people shouldn't be encouraged, they should be helped to understand how to be happy in the body they were born with.
Not that you'll listen, but as someone who is not transgender, or even likely a medical professional, why do you feel that you can authoritatively state that your way is the correct treatment? How would you explain the significant improvement in quality of life I've experienced since transitioning, hmm? Am I imagining it?
>>64585927
Through knowledge they shared with the observer obviously. Seriously, name a middle-aged transgendered person who successfully passes as the gender they imitate.
Just one.
I'm waiting.
>>64585862
Caitlyn Jenner
>>64586015
That's literally the point, trans people who pass have no reason to disclose that to people other than those they are intimate with.
>>64585705
>cherry picking
See, I started out with the typical chan-banter that I've become accustomed to using in sort of a "when in rome" scenario, and since then, I think I've done an exceedingly satisfactory job of elevating the dialogue to accommodate the turn that the thread quickly took. And you continue to cling to those comments in a weak and lazy attempt to discredit me.
Yes... Typical. Fucking. Liberal
And BTW, I now understand the confusion about using the term Tranny. Someone else used it, and I responded, using the same term. Jesus Christ, do you not see how petty this is?
>>64586015
You seemed to miss the point of what I just said.
You argued that you've never seen a passable transperson, the implication being that therefore, no transpeople are passable.
If you saw a transperson that "passed," you would assume they were cisgendered and you would continue believing "no transpeople are passable."
The knowledge beforehand that someone is trans introduces a bias.
I'm telling you that your statement does not logically follow.
I don't really want to play this "name one" game because you'll reject any example I give. I will point you out to Billy Tipton if you care to know of an example of someone who's biological sex was only discovered when he died.
>>64585992
>I'm not sure how I'm all over the map, I've been pretty consistent in my position, perhaps you have me confused with someone else
I have
>Mate, I'm not gonna buddy up with someone with your disparaging beliefs
You imbeciles are really starting to bore me
>>64575992
seriously? i don't believe that you actually care about whatever image you think she owes you when pretty much the entirety of i am a bird now is about being trans.
>people are still arguing in this thread
How autistic are you guys?
>>64586145
>Cisgendered
>either male or female
Fixed
>>64586192
Extremely
>>64585992
>How would you explain the significant improvement in quality of life I've experienced since transitioning, hmm? Am I imagining it?
I'm sure you're very happy just as obsessive-compulsives are happy after they wash their hands forty times in a row or just as serial killers are happy as they masturbate over the body of their latest victim. But your personal happiness doesn't legitimize your disorder. Are you able to function in society? Are you free of depression and anxiety unlike the vast majority of your transgendered peers? Are you able to perform basic living tasks and communicate with others? Do you suffer from abnormal amounts of stress and poor self-esteem.
Most transgendered people would answer no to every single one of these questions, and with good reason.
>>64586029
Is that a joke? He doesn't pass at all. He has prominent mannish features.
>>64586084
Sorry but the burden of proof is to demonstrate their existence. You've been unable to do so now after being asked to do so several times, so I'm fairly confident that they don't exist outside of hypotheticals.
>>64586085
Yes, which I said about an hour ago. you adopted the word someone else used, it's no different than had you said "I didn't make this topic about niggers!"
And you used tranny here too:
>>64576936
As much as you try to pretend some random person just entered that quote chain to impersonate you and use a term you just used a few minutes earlier.
We never got to the level of having a serious discussion because you've been crying that I called you an asshole for acting like an obnoxious /b/tard and ranting about "SJWs"
>>64586152
>You imbeciles are really starting to bore me
It's not like you're obliged to respond. But if you feel like it, would you mind explaining how your belief that anyone who supports the idea that gender is more than sex is somehow only doing it for 'libstars', and your constant misgendering is somehow not disparaging? Unless that's not you and I also have you confused, in which case I apologise.
>>64586192
Do you think any of us have anything better to do?
>>64586208
What?
>>64581535
Most of your argument is based on the assumption that human understanding of/interpretation of our world in the scientific community is unbiased by social constructs
this is an essentialist view
try reading about gender essentialism vs gender artifactualism (i think you are trying to articulate an argument against the latter but in doing so are failing to recognize that you have adopted the former view which is just as problematic)
>>64586282
That's the same guy, who is OP.
Judging by this post, he's also from /pol/:
>>64576701
>>64586269
You're right, it's no different. What's your point?
The second one is STILL not me
>we never got to have a serious discussion
>because you've been acting like a /b/tard
Well if you say so, anon; although I must say, this is quite a lot of time you've spent bickering with a "/b/tard"
A-mazing
>>64586260
The difference is that obsessive-compulsive disorder seriously inhibits the sufferer's ability to function in society, and the serial killer should obviously be stopped as their disorder causes harm to others. My particular affliction literally harms nobody else, and whilst surgery and HRT are potentially not the healthiest things, they're vastly better than the alternative - I view it in the same vein as someone with no thyroid having to take medication for the rest of their life.
To answer your questions, yes I am able to function to some degree in society, I have a part time job and am working towards a degree. I still struggle with depression and anxiety and poor self esteem to some degree, but I'm nowhere near the self-harming, suicidal, reticent wreck I used to be. Again, it's anecdotal, but I'd say this particular case was a success.
>>64586332
In that case you can add the idea that trans people are delusional to that list of disparaging remarks.
>>64586145
I understand your point and refuted it successfully with a concise sentence already--"Through knowledge they shared with the observer obviously." Your hypothetical scenario is moronic because it is possible to look at person, be mistaken about their gender, and then learn it later on through further knowledge. This is actually a goal for many transgendered people.
The implication you're wasting so much breath over is not that no transgendered people are able to successfully pass as another; the implication is that the overwhelming majority of transgendered people cannot and will not successfully pass because they are fundamentally different from the gender they are imitating on a biological level.
I'm sure there are examples of that minority who do but they are extremely rare and usually benefit from ambiguous features and extensive manipulation of their body and image rather than an actual resemblance.
>>64586427
And this is quite a lot of time to be bickering with an "SJW"
It goes both ways.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBIubgsfK8E
very enriching...
Uh oh, shit is heating up again. Bleeding-hearts want to take on the ENEMY!! I can only handle so many simpletons people...
>>64586282
>is gender more than sex?
Only insofar as you make it out to be. It's mostly an abstract product of the imagination.
>>64586297
Huh?
>>64586313
>most of your argument is based on the assumption that human understanding of/interpretation of our world in the scientific community is unbiased by social constructs
Is it? Testosterone and estrogen? Chromosomes? Reproductive systems? These are social constructs? And have never stated that societal precoceptions about gender do not play a part in this; however, I don't buy into the abstract nonsense about genderfluidity and such things.
>>64586332
>also from /pol/
Demonize, polarize, and alienate .... that's the name of the game, huh? I don't think there are many Sanders supporters on /pol/, but frankly I've only visited once or twice
>>64586543
And your logic is moronic because it's possible to look at a person, be "mistaken" about their gender, and never learn about it with further knowledge. Do you think you've successfully identified every trans person you walk by? I'd love to hear how you came to that conclusion.
>This is actually a goal for many transgendered people.
Haha, what? The goal for many trans people is to fool you into thinking they're the opposite gender and then tell you the truth? Alright then.
>I'm sure there are examples....
Yes, like the ONE I just gave when you asked me to "name just one." Some nice goal post moving we have here though.
>>64586543
You should check this out https://www.reddit.com/r/transtimelines/top/?sort=top&t=all
Also might I add that as somebody who passes 100%, I would never tell people that I was trans.
>>64586427
You're impossible
I've been attempting to provide concise and comprehensive points for quite some time now -- that's a whole lot more than I can say for you.
This is why I never wanted children
>>64586678
>Huh?
Could you actually elaborate, because I don't know what the implication was supposed to be.
>>64586678
>Uh oh, shit is heating up again. Bleeding-hearts want to take on the ENEMY!! I can only handle so many simpletons people...
>>64586793
"Cisgenered" an absurd term that is used to appeal to the tiny fraction of the population who suffer from a mental illness. It's also used to appeal to the indoctrinated individuals who are ready to attack anyone who does not comply -- the herd of independent minds
>>64586703
>>64586703
>And your logic is moronic because it's possible to look at a person, be "mistaken" about their gender, and never learn about it with further knowledge.
According to you this is the only possible situation? No other can occur? Ever?
>Do you think you've successfully identified every trans person you walk by? I'd love to hear how you came to that conclusion.
If I'm introduced to a person and they're transgendered, I immediately notice it, yes. Just because I didn't start retching in the street doesn't mean I didn't notice the feigned pitch in your voice or your oversized hands or your throbbing adam's apple. I can't consider a person who is only able to pass when nobody pays attention to them to be particularly successful.
>The goal for many trans people is to fool you into thinking they're the opposite gender
Obviously...
>and then tell you the truth
That depends on the person and how moral they are.
>Yes, like the ONE I just gave when you asked me to "name just one." Some nice goal post moving we have here though.
You sincerely think Caitlyn Jenner passes? He's one of the most famous people in the country because of his prior history as a male-identifying man. I don't think anybody could see him and think, "Look at that-- there's a woman I don't know with no surgery or anything strange or funny about her appearance." Everybody knows Caityln is a transgender.
>>64586864
Lol
See, if you overly sensitive pussies were to take a page from /b/ every now and then, instead of being so goddamn stiff and smug all the time, there could have been a whole lot more levity to this epic journey of a thread.
>>64586896
That's great and all, but what word do you want me to use in that context? How shall I differentiate transgender from cisgender in a sentence that doesn't trigger you? Did you want me to say "yucky trannies" and "glorious normal people?"
Sorry man, I'm one of those sheeple who was indoctrinated to not be an asshole.
>>64586593
Fuck, I'm getting loopy. This >>64586766 was meant for you, you glorious dumbass!
>>64586903
>According to you this is the only possible situation? No other can occur? Ever?
Haha, what? No, that's not what I said. There are 700,000 trans people in the US. Not every one is going to tell you they are trans. Don't be obtuse.
>If I'm introduced to a person and they're transgendered, I immediately notice it, yes.
It's a shame because I don't think you understand what I'm saying to you. Try to read this and see if you can wrap your head around it:
http://skepticsplay.blogspot.ca/2010/01/toupees-and-stereotypes.html
>That depends on the person and how moral they are.
Hahaha, what? No one has a moral obligation to tell you if they are trans or not.
>You sincerely think Caitlyn Jenner passes? He's one of the most famous people in the country because of his prior history as a male-identifying man. I don't think anybody could see him and think, "Look at that-- there's a woman I don't know with no surgery or anything strange or funny about her appearance." Everybody knows Caityln is a transgender.
You asked for one example. I gave you Billy Tipton (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Tipton). You ignored my example and chose another one instead.
>>64587014
Yes, at some point, about 30 posts in, you finally decided to put forward a fairly coherent argument. I wouldn't say it was concise or comprehensive though considering you stomped your feet at the request for a citation and promptly declared yourself the "winner."
>>64586964
If you recognize a Transgender as either a male or female, then why have a term that essentially contradicts that? There are males, females, and hermaphrodites... everything else is mental acrobatics.
Believe it or not, in person, I'm very polite, and would refer to a trans person by their respective pronouns. I have no desire to hurt someone, simply because they have a mental illness.
Transgenders do not offend me -- attacks on reason is what boils my blood
>>64587108
>This post is still getting replies
Lol
Just take a step back and observe yourselves, anons
>>64587129
I stomped my feet at the request for a citation on "how science sheds light on the multitude of ways that innate biological traits play an effect on gender." Yes, I was incredulous at your incredulity, and so I balked at the notion by jokingly invoking "science".
>>64587087
>There are 700,000 trans people in the US. Not every one is going to tell you they are trans. Don't be obtuse.
Again, the vast majority won't have to because they do not pass. What aren't you getting?
>http://skepticsplay.blogspot.ca/2010/01/toupees-and-stereotypes.html
This entire article is predicated on the assumption that what is being spotted is not an appearance but homosexual behavior. Whereas transgenderism is entirely based around image, and can easily be identified not necessarily by behaviors but by gender-specific attributes the transgendered person was unable to remove.
And for the record, most hair transplants and toupees are fairly obvious, and that's just one trait rather than dozens which the transgendered person has to maintain constantly despite being biologically prone to failure.
>No one has a moral obligation to tell you if they are trans or not.
I guess they don't in the same sense that nobody has a moral obligation to me that they're lying. But I would prefer if they did, and so would most people. Fortunately it's rarely an issue that comes up since, as was previously stated in quite clear terms, the overwhelming majority of transgendered people do not pass.
>You asked for one example. I gave you Billy Tipton (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Tipton). You ignored my example and chose another one instead.
I didn't notice this example, sorry. Billy Tipton is a good example of the extremely rare person who was successful passed. It's partially because she lived during a time when people were totally unaware of the transgendered and did not know how to identify them, and partially because women have more ambiguous features than men. I'm not sure I consider relevant to the discussion because I doubt she would be able to live in modern society without being immediately spotted.
>>64587363
> Billy Tipton is a good example of the extremely rare person who was successful passed
Yes, HE was particularly lucky considering he couldn't take testosterone back then, but I will tell you, the vast majority of trans guys who take testosterone will inevitably pass. It is harder for mtf individuals, yes, but not as rare as you think, and in any case being unpassable is no reason to not respect someone's identity.
>>64587301
>If you recognize a Transgender as either a male or female, then why have a term that essentially contradicts that?
Ah, so you'd like it if we dropped cis/trans altogether and just referred to people by their preferred pronoun? Very progressive of you, Mr. /pol/. I agree with this in principal, but how shall we discuss issues specifically as they pertain to trans people?
>Believe it or not, in person, I'm very polite, and would refer to a trans person by their respective pronouns
It's a shame anonymity turns you into such an asshat.
>Transgenders do not offend me -- attacks on reason is what boils my blood
This sounds way funnier than you probably indented it to be.
>I stomped my feet at the request for a citation on "how science sheds light on the multitude of ways that innate biological traits play an effect on gender."
Nope, that was your response to me asking for a citation. Remember, you said it was an indisputable "fact" in science that "gender and sex are inextricable" and your hand waving response that "hormones, reproductive systems and anatomy" can account for ALL gendered characteristics. And you actually thought you were dropping a bombshell when you cited "science."
>>64587363
Haha, I'm guessing you're OP too, that's fun.
>This entire article is predicated on the assumption that what is being spotted is not an appearance but homosexual behavior.
And homosexual "behaviour" is perceived... how?
>And for the record, most hair transplants and toupees are fairly obvious
Holy shit, I'm starting to think you have some serious reading comprehension problems. Let me quote another source and hope you'll pick up on it:
>“Toupées always look fake. I’ve never seen a single toupee where I couldn’t tell what it was!”
>If the toupée looks real, you don’t end up noticing it’s a toupée, you just assume it’s real hair. So in terms of how you think toupées typically look, you end up with an extremely skewed perspective.
>>64587779
>>64587363
>>64587666
>I guess they don't in the same sense that nobody has a moral obligation to me that they're lying. But I would prefer if they did, and so would most people.
Not telling you they're trans != they're lying to you, though..?
It's fucking hilarious that you prefer people tell you though. For what purpose?
>I didn't notice this example, sorry. Billy Tipton is a good example of the extremely rare person who was successful passed. It's partially because she lived during a time when people were totally unaware of the transgendered and did not know how to identify them, and partially because women have more ambiguous features than men. I'm not sure I consider relevant to the discussion because I doubt she would be able to live in modern society without being immediately spotted.
Fucking hell, this goalpost moving. I could give you a modern example, but you'll find another way to disregard it and ask for REAL evidence. You're a fucking moron.
OP here! Weeeew, well that was quite a ride, goys and goyls.
Last chance to get any fallacies out of your systems before I pass out from cheap wine!
If your shallow wells have run dry, then I'd like to state the fact that this has been an enriching and informative experience, and you're open-mindedness will live on through me, as an acolyte for my wrongheaded and bigoted ways.
Namaste
wew
Stay out of my bathrooms transweirdos
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>64587922
TARGETS NEW TRANS POLICY IS GOING TO ALLOW SEXUAL PREDATORS INTO THE WOMANS WASHROOM. I WILL PROVE THIS BY FILMING MYSELF USING THE WOMANS BATHROOM.
